Wildlife Control Boynton Beach Wildlife control in Boynton Beach, FL, requires more than removing an animal that has entered your home or business. AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides professional inspections, humane removal services, exclusion repairs, cleanup, and customized prevention solutions designed to address the entire wildlife problem. Boynton Beach’s…Wildlife Control Boynton Beach Wildlife control in Boynton Beach, FL, requires more than removing an animal that has entered your home or business. AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides professional inspections, humane removal services, exclusion repairs, cleanup, and customized prevention solutions designed to address the entire wildlife problem. Boynton Beach’s warm climate, mature trees, canals, parks, and established neighborhoods provide food, water, and shelter for raccoons, squirrels, bats, rodents, birds, and other wildlife. These animals may enter attics, walls, crawl spaces, garages, vents, and roof openings while searching for a safe place to live or raise their young. Our wildlife control process may include species identification, entry-point inspections, humane trapping, one-way exclusion devices, attic cleanup, sanitization, and durable structural repairs. Technicians carefully inspect soffits, fascia boards, roof returns, vents, flashing, chimneys, and utility penetrations to find active and potential access points. Nuisance wildlife can chew electrical wiring, tear insulation, damage wood, block ventilation, and contaminate indoor spaces with droppings, urine, nesting debris, and food remains. Removing the animals without securing the structure may allow the problem to return. Repairing vulnerable areas is an important part of effective long-term wildlife control. If you need wildlife control in Boynton Beach, FL, contact AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches today. Our experienced team can inspect your property, recommend an appropriate solution, and help protect your home or business from recurring wildlife activity. More on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-2apw-isXI On Sound Cloud: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches provides professional and humane wildlife removal services in Boynton Beach, Florida. Contact Us: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches 4440 PGA Blvd Suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens , FL , 33410 561-515-0201 Website: https://palm-beaches.aaacwildliferemoval.com/ Email: palmbeaches@aaacwildliferemoval.com Find us around the web: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aaacwildliferemovalofthepa5785 Facebook: Twitter: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/aaac-wildlife-removal Blogger: WordPress: Tumblr:
AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL provides professional solutions for homeowners and businesses dealing with unwanted animals on their properties. This SoundCloud playlist from AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches covers wildlife concerns commonly found throughout Boynton Beach, including animals entering attics, walls, crawl spaces,…AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL provides professional solutions for homeowners and businesses dealing with unwanted animals on their properties. This SoundCloud playlist from AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches covers wildlife concerns commonly found throughout Boynton Beach, including animals entering attics, walls, crawl spaces, garages, roofs, and other sheltered areas. Listen to helpful information about raccoon removal, squirrel removal, bat exclusion, rodent control, dead animal removal, and other nuisance wildlife services. Each track explains common signs of wildlife activity, potential property damage, and the importance of addressing entry points before the problem becomes more serious. AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches uses humane removal and exclusion methods based on the animal species and conditions of the property. Our process may include a detailed inspection, removal or one-way exclusion, entry-point repairs, attic cleanup, sanitation, and prevention strategies designed to reduce the risk of future wildlife activity. Whether you hear scratching in the attic, notice droppings, find damaged vents, or see animals entering through gaps along the roofline, professional help is available. Explore this playlist to learn more about AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL, and contact AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches for dependable wildlife inspection, removal, repair, and prevention services. More on Sound Cloud: On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOWZCRTu3GM0 AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches provides professional and humane wildlife removal services in Boynton Beach, Florida. Contact Us: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches 4440 PGA Blvd Suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens , FL , 33410 561-515-0201 Website: https://palm-beaches.aaacwildliferemoval.com/ Email: palmbeaches@aaacwildliferemoval.com Find us around the web: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aaacwildliferemovalofthepa5785 Facebook: Twitter: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/aaac-wildlife-removal Blogger: WordPress: Tumblr:
“Chocolate, avocados, onions, and moldy foods are some of the most poisonous items you can leave out for squirrels. Even small amounts of these everyday ingredients can cause serious health issues—or be fatal—for these sensitive rodents.” Squirrels may look harmless scampering across your fence or chasing each other up a…“Chocolate, avocados, onions, and moldy foods are some of the most poisonous items you can leave out for squirrels. Even small amounts of these everyday ingredients can cause serious health issues—or be fatal—for these sensitive rodents.” Squirrels may look harmless scampering across your fence or chasing each other up a tree, but when they show up in your attic or tear through your garden, that charm disappears fast. In leafy neighborhoods where parks are close by and backyard bird feeders are everywhere, it’s no surprise that squirrels are regular visitors—and sometimes uninvited tenants. While many people enjoy watching them or even tossing out food, what you leave behind can actually be dangerous to squirrels—and a bigger headache for you without proper squirrel control . This article isn’t about harming wildlife. It’s about knowing what food is poisonous to squirrels so you don’t accidentally invite them in or make them sick. If you’ve been leaving out scraps, filling feeders, or composting without thinking twice, there’s a good chance you’re creating a squirrel buffet without even realizing it. Let’s break down what to avoid, what to secure, and how to protect both your home and the squirrels from a bad encounter. What Is The Most Dangerous Foods for Squirrels? Chocolate and Caffeinated Products Chocolate is one of the most toxic substances you can accidentally leave out for squirrels or any rodent. It contains theobromine—a stimulant that these small animals can’t metabolize effectively. Just a small amount from a brownie, chocolate almond bar, or sugar-filled candy can trigger tremors, elevated heart rate, or seizures in squirrels. Since they have such fast metabolisms and tiny bodies, the toxic effects hit hard and fast, often with serious consequences. Caffeinated foods and drinks are equally dangerous. Coffee grounds , soda spills, or chocolate-covered espresso beans tossed into a compost pile can be life-threatening if a squirrel gets into them. Where outdoor parties and backyard BBQs are common, it’s easy for sugary or caffeine-rich snacks to end up where rodents roam. To keep squirrels safe and your property clear of unwelcome visitors, make it a habit to clean up thoroughly and store all sweet or stimulant-laced foods securely. Avocados Avocados contain persin, a fungicidal toxin found in the fruit’s skin, pit, and even its leaves. While persin might not harm humans, it can be toxic to many animals, including squirrels. The risk isn’t just in eating an avocado—squirrels that nibble on a discarded peel, chewed seed, or exposed pit can experience digestive issues or worse. What makes this even more concerning is how easily avocado waste can be overlooked, especially in compost bins. If you’re growing avocado trees or preparing guacamole from scratch, this is something to stay mindful of. As urban farming and composting become more popular, the risk of accidentally exposing squirrels to this toxic fruit increases. Make sure avocado scraps are properly sealed or discarded, and if you have a tree, regularly clear fallen fruit from the yard. It’s better to be safe than to unknowingly poison a local animal. Onions, Garlic, and Spicy Foods While these aromatic kitchen staples may keep your chili full of flavor, they spell serious trouble for squirrels. Onions and garlic contain compounds that can damage red blood cells, leading to anemia and other health complications. The danger extends to cooked dishes, too. If a squirrel gets into leftover food seasoned with garlic or onions, even in small amounts, it can suffer lasting effects. In worst cases, repeated exposure can be fatal over time. Spicy foods also pack a punch that squirrels can’t handle. Hot sauce remnants, chili powder, or discarded tacos can cause severe digestive distress. Where spicy dishes are a staple, food waste often ends up in outdoor bins or compost piles. Make sure spicy scraps are stored in critter-proof containers, and avoid tossing seasoned leftovers near your patio or yard. The goal isn’t just to avoid harming squirrels—it’s to stop inviting them altogether. Alcohol and Fermented Fruit Alcohol might seem like an unlikely threat to wildlife, but squirrels are highly sensitive to it. Whether it’s beer spills from a tailgate, wine left out on the porch, or sugary cocktails left on patio tables, these drinks can lead to disorientation, slowed reaction time, and eventually liver failure in squirrels. Their small bodies can’t handle even trace amounts, and it doesn’t take much to put them in serious danger. Another sneaky culprit? Overripe or fermenting fruit, especially in backyards with peach, fig, or persimmon trees. As the fruit falls and begins to break down, it can release natural alcohols that attract squirrels and get them intoxicated. They may stagger, fall from trees, or become easy prey for predators. Regularly clean up fruit from the ground and keep alcoholic beverages secure during outdoor events. Salty Snacks and Chips Salt is another ingredient that can easily disrupt a squirrel’s internal balance. While humans can handle a salty snack during a football game or backyard hangout, squirrels don’t process salt well. Even a few bites of junk food like chips, pretzels, or salted walnut snacks can dehydrate them and overwork their kidneys. These types of treats also contain added sugar and artificial ingredients that offer zero nutritional value for squirrels—making them both harmful and useless from a dietary perspective. Many of these items—especially sugary breakfast cereals or processed snack mixes—are casually dropped or tossed outside without much thought. But to a hungry squirrel, that forgotten bowl of cereal or spilled trail mix is a full meal. Where outdoor events, food trucks, and weekend cookouts are part of the culture, squirrels quickly learn where the good stuff is. Cleaning up sugary crumbs and sealing snack waste tightly are easy steps that help discourage squirrels from turning your yard into their favorite buffet line. Surprising “Healthy” Foods That Still Poisonous To Squirrels Not all squirrel-dangerous foods are obviously harmful. Some look totally natural or even nutritious—but for squirrels, they can cause more harm than good. These foods often show up in gardens, bird feeders, compost piles, or well-meaning attempts to “feed the wildlife.” Here’s what to watch for. Raw Corn (Especially Moldy Corn) Corn might seem harmless—it’s a common ingredient in bird seed, livestock feed, and even human snacks. But when corn starts to mold, it can develop aflatoxins, which are highly toxic to squirrels and many other animals. Aflatoxins are produced by certain types of fungi and can affect liver function, immune systems, and even lead to cancer in wildlife. A squirrel doesn’t have to eat much moldy corn for it to cause serious internal damage. The risk goes up during warm, humid stretches—especially in summer—when moisture speeds up mold growth. Corn that’s left outside for too long, stored improperly in feeders, or tossed into compost piles can quickly become a hidden hazard. If you’re putting out corn in a feeder, store it in a dry place, change it frequently, and never offer anything that smells off or looks discolored. It’s not just about nutrition—it’s about safety. Bread and Processed Carbs Bread might feel like a safe, throwaway snack for critters—but it’s actually a poor and potentially harmful food choice for squirrels. Bread, crackers, and other refined carbs offer little to no nutrition, and they can expand in a squirrel’s stomach, leading to bloating or discomfort. In some cases, processed bread products contain preservatives and additives that are hard for squirrels to digest, weakening their system over time. Squirrels that eat too much bread often end up malnourished despite feeling full. This is especially common in neighborhoods where residents leave out food “just to be nice.” Unfortunately, the kindness backfires. Instead of helping, you may be attracting squirrels that grow dependent on an unhealthy food source—and more likely to take up permanent residence in your attic. If you want to be squirrel-friendly, stick to natural deterrents and avoid the bread basket. Peanuts (Especially Salted or Moldy) Peanuts are a bit of a wildcard. While they’re often seen in squirrel food blends or used to lure wildlife for photos, they aren’t actually nuts—they’re legumes. And when they’re salted, roasted, or worse, moldy, they become a serious risk. Moldy peanuts, like corn, can carry aflatoxins that attack a squirrel’s liver and immune system. Salted peanuts, on the other hand, can cause dehydration and kidney stress. This matters because many people use peanuts to feed birds or squirrels without realizing the risks. In fact, some birdseed mixes from big-box stores still include them. If you’re trying to keep squirrels away from your yard—or avoid poisoning them by accident—skip the peanuts. And if you must use them, go for raw, unsalted, and fresh, and use a squirrel-proof bird feeder so your effort to help one species doesn’t endanger another. Foods That Attract Squirrels (But Shouldn’t) Some foods might not be poisonous, but they’re basically neon signs saying “Free Snacks Here!” for squirrels. These attractants can lead to more frequent visits, nesting, and eventual infestations. If you’re trying to squirrel-proof your yard or keep them from invading your home, these are the items to manage carefully. Bird Seed and Pet Food Bird feeders are one of the top culprits for squirrel problems. Many blends contain sunflower seeds, millet, corn, and peanuts—aka squirrel candy. Once they find a reliable food source, squirrels will return again and again, sometimes destroying the feeder in the process. The same goes for pet food left outside. Dry kibble and wet food alike are high-protein, calorie-dense meals that squirrels will happily devour. Where backyard birdwatching is popular and outdoor pet bowls are commo
Document Type Report Publication Date 6-1993 Abstract The status of black bears in North America ranges from pest to threatened. The species appears relatively secure throughout most parts of its range except the southeastern coastal plain; in this region a number of disjunct populations exist on primarily publicly owned lands.…Document Type Report Publication Date 6-1993 Abstract The status of black bears in North America ranges from pest to threatened. The species appears relatively secure throughout most parts of its range except the southeastern coastal plain; in this region a number of disjunct populations exist on primarily publicly owned lands. Concern over the status of Ursus americanus luteolus led to a petition to list this subspecies under the Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act is arguably the most important wildlife legislation in recent years. However, applying this valuable, but young, untested, and evolving legislation to the black bear subspecies is judged unwarranted and premature because of the following reasons: (1) extensive restocking efforts with Ursus americanus americanus from outside the region and empirical evidence of breeding with native animals, (2) bears of different subspecies using dispersal corridors and likely past and future artificial shuffling of bears, (3) genetic evidence of a homogeneous population throughout the region, (4) likely influence of nutrient-rich habitats and phenotypic responses by the bears, (5) historically applying artificial subspecific criteria, (6) historically underestimating initial population estimates and documenting these underestimates through intensive site-specific studies, (7) large amounts of existing bottomland hardwood forests in Louisiana and their concomitant relative stability into the future because of public ownership and regulation, (8) recent history of applying the Endangered Species Act to some charismatic megafauna and resulting problems of consistency, equitability, flexibility, expediency, and perceptions as well as breadth of interpreting the present Endangered Species Act, and (9) many remaining important, unanswered questions. Certainly, the more than 30 "populations" in the Southeast need our attention, particularly the smaller, more disjunct ones. The Endangered Species Act is a valuable tool but the wrong one to apply in this instance without substantially more documentation, research, and modification. Help for bears in the region may better be provided through existing state, federal, and private cooperation by a regional organization such as the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Recommended Citation United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, "Proceedings of the Fourth Western Black Bear Workshop" (1993). Wildlife Conservation and Management. Paper 9. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/govdocs_wildlife/9 DOWNLOADS Since August 29, 2011 COinS
Wildlife Animal Removal Boynton Beach Wildlife animal removal in Boynton Beach, FL, requires a professional approach that addresses both the nuisance animals and the openings they use to enter a property. AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides detailed inspections, humane removal solutions, exclusion repairs, and prevention services for local homes…Wildlife Animal Removal Boynton Beach Wildlife animal removal in Boynton Beach, FL, requires a professional approach that addresses both the nuisance animals and the openings they use to enter a property. AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides detailed inspections, humane removal solutions, exclusion repairs, and prevention services for local homes and businesses. Boynton Beach’s warm climate, mature trees, canals, parks, and established neighborhoods support raccoons, squirrels, bats, rodents, birds, and other wildlife. These animals may enter attics, walls, crawl spaces, garages, vents, and roof openings while searching for food, water, shelter, or a protected nesting area. Our wildlife animal removal process may include species identification, entry-point inspections, humane trapping, one-way exclusion devices, attic cleanup, sanitization, and durable repairs. Technicians carefully examine soffits, fascia boards, roof returns, vents, flashing, chimneys, and utility penetrations to locate active and potential access points. Nuisance wildlife can tear insulation, chew electrical wiring, damage wood, block ventilation, and contaminate indoor spaces with droppings, urine, nesting materials, and food remains. Removing the animals without repairing entry points may allow the same problem to return. A complete solution should protect the property against future wildlife activity. If you need wildlife animal removal in Boynton Beach, FL, contact AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches today. Our experienced team can inspect your property, recommend an appropriate removal plan, and help protect your home or business from unwanted animals. More on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZCcQVvl-uQ On Sound Cloud: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches provides professional and humane wildlife removal services in Boynton Beach, Florida. Contact Us: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches 4440 PGA Blvd Suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens , FL , 33410 561-515-0201 Website: https://palm-beaches.aaacwildliferemoval.com/ Email: palmbeaches@aaacwildliferemoval.com Find us around the web: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aaacwildliferemovalofthepa5785 Facebook: Twitter: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/aaac-wildlife-removal Blogger: WordPress: Tumblr:
Author affiliation: Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald–Insel Riems, Germany (A. Günther, J. Wassermann, J. Heck, A. Aebischer, C. Staubach, H. Bergmann, M. Beer, G. Schares, K. Wernike); Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands (M. Bussi); Helmholtz Institute for One Health, Greifswald, Germany (F.H. Leendertz); University of Greifswald, Greifswald (F.H. Leendertz) The shift of seasonal…Author affiliation: Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald–Insel Riems, Germany (A. Günther, J. Wassermann, J. Heck, A. Aebischer, C. Staubach, H. Bergmann, M. Beer, G. Schares, K. Wernike); Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands (M. Bussi); Helmholtz Institute for One Health, Greifswald, Germany (F.H. Leendertz); University of Greifswald, Greifswald (F.H. Leendertz) The shift of seasonal epizootics toward a perpetual enzootic in Europe became a milestone in the epidemiology of highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses (HPAIV) ( 1 ). Rooted in a common ancestral virus of the goose/Guangdong influenza lineage in Southeast Asia, the evolving diversity of subtype H5 genotypes in Europe paved the way for the ongoing panzootic, globally threatening domestic and wild birds alike and resulting in numerous mammalian spillover infections worldwide. A broad and increasing spectrum of terrestrial, semiaquatic, and marine or aquatic mammalian species is affected ( 2 ). Despite the recent developments of mastitis in domestic cattle through ascending udder infections with HPAIV H5 ( 3 ), the more constant interface over the years was direct, often alimentary, exposure to HPAIV H5–positive prey or food ( 4 ). Infections in predatory or scavenging species frequently caused neurologic signs, including severe encephalitis as cause of death ( 5 ). The concern about increasing chances for spillover events from birds to mammals proved to be justified already in the early stage of enzootic HPAIV H5 in Europe. However, those studies also suggested a certain level of asymptomatic infections and the possibility of surviving exposure ( 6 ). We compared HPAIV H5 antibody prevalences between mammal groups in Germany that had frequent contact opportunities (carnivores) and conceivable or unlikely contact opportunities (omnivores and herbivores). We identify frequently affected host groups and factors that ultimately favor the risk for infection in carnivores. During December 2023–February 2025, we collected samples from 644 hunted predator game (group I) and 343 hoofed game animals (groups II and III) in the context of an ongoing disease surveillance project in the federal state of Mecklenburg–Western Pomerania in northeast Germany. In particular, the offshore islands and the mainland coast form important avian migratory areas but also breeding habitats with a high overall species diversity and abundance of wild birds. Many of those species have been affected during various HPAI H5 epizootics and the recent enzootic ( 7 ). Predator game consisted of 5 species of the taxonomic families Canidae, Procyonidae, and Mustelidae ( Table ). Cervidae, Bovidae, and Suidae form groups II and III with five different species in total (1 sampled individual animal remains unspecified). We screened nasal swab and, for group I, lung and brain samples (n = 980) by using quantitative reverse transcription PCR for influenza A virus (IAV) RNA ( Appendix Table 1). All 980 samples tested negative. Nucleoprotein (NP)–based ELISA indicated no seropositivity against IAV in wild ruminants, whereas 5.2% (95% CI 1.9%–11.0%) of the wild boar ( Sus scrofa ) and all carnivorous species, except the single tested European pine marten ( Martes martes ), tested positive ( Table ) ( Appendix ). The subsequent ELISA for detection of H5-specific antibodies revealed 3.5% (95% CI 0.9%–8.7%) seropositive wild boar and 12.5% (95% CI 0.3%–52.7%) to 21.9% (95% CI 12.5%–34.0%) seropositive carnivorous species ( Table ; Appendix Table 1), thereby confirming most of the seropositivity caused by an IAV of subtype H5. The percentage of non–H5 IAV antibody-positive animals ranged from 4.7% (95% CI 0.9%–13.1%) in raccoons ( Procyon lotor ) and 4% (95% CI 2.4%–6.9%) in (red) foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ) to 1.7% (95% CI 0.2%–6.1%) in wild boar and 1.1% (95% CI 0.1%–3.9%) in raccoon dogs ( Nyctereutes procyonoides ). We also tested a subset of NP-antibody positive or negative samples through serum neutralization test to confirm the presence or absence of antibodies against subtype H5 ( Appendix ). We confirmed the ELISA findings in a representative subset of 8 IAV-positive but H5-negative carnivore samples and compared them with 4 H5-positive samples, whereas H5 seropositivity in wild boar samples remained below the detection limit of the serum neutralization test. Wild ruminants represent mammalian species with rather unlikely contact possibilities to potentially infected wild birds and, as herbivores, no apparent interface in their diet. However, direct exposure cannot be ruled out, and low susceptibility might be another plausible explanation for our consistent seronegative findings. At the other end of the food chain, our serologic results suggest previous exposure of carnivores to subtype H5 viruses. Raccoons, foxes, and raccoon dogs represent the species with the highest proportion of seropositivity ( Table ). Despite similar host species tested, our results only partially confirm observations of previous studies, where mainly stone martens and foxes were found to be seropositive in about 1 third of the animals tested ( 6 ). That discrepancy indicates the relevance of factors other than host susceptibility and host occurrence. Figure Figure . Percentage of highly pathogenic avian influenza subtype H5 seropositive juvenile and adult red foxes ( Vulpes vulpes ), by municipality, on the Island Rügen, northeast Germany, December 2023–February 2025. White... Univariable regression analysis ( Figure ) revealed that foxes from the Island Rügen collected close to the bay coast, close to the Baltic Sea, or close to watercourses had an increased risk for H5-specific antibodies (p<0.05) ( Appendix Table 2, 3). Seropositivity increased with age; 11.6% (10/86) of the juvenile and 23.5% (43/183) of the adult foxes were positive for H5-specific antibodies. A final multivariable model ( Appendix Table 4) selected by stepwise forward–backward selection, which also included age, revealed that, with increasing distance to watercourses (e.g., flowing waters, water source areas, streams, ditches, rivers, and canals), the risk for foxes being positive for H5-specific antibodies decreased (p<0.0001); however, with increasing distance to shrubland (e.g., hedges, bushes, field crops, groups of trees, rows of trees, avenues, dominant single trees, and groups of shrubs), the risk increased (p<0.005). In contrast, high proportions of shrubland in a 2.5-km buffer zone around the sampling site of foxes represented a protective factor (p<0.005), supporting the assumption of less exposure to HPAIV through water-associated hosts, including Anseriformes birds, for example, that are known to graze on open lands. The possible existence of a similar correlation for omnivorous species might serve as explanation for the 3.5% (95% CI 0.9%–8.7%) seropositivity in wild boar. In addition to their scavenging or predatory behavior ( 8 ), wild boars have been described as nest robbers of waterfowl species in other wetland areas in Europe ( 9 ). All individual animals with H5-specific antibodies belonged to family groups roaming in water-associated zones (e.g., the Island Rügen and Fischland-Darß-Zingst) ( Appendix Table 1), where a higher likelihood of interaction with waterfowl species can be expected. After the previous HPAIV H5N8 epizootic during 2016–2017, a broad serologic investigation in wild boars was conducted in southern Germany ( 10 ). Low-level prevalence of H5N8 neutralizing antibodies (1.13%) were detected; a single positive case occurred close to a prior HPAI outbreak in waterfowl ( 10 , 11 ). In domestic pigs the overall susceptibility in experimental settings remained low despite a high infectious dose of a single clade 2.3.4.4b strain ( 12 ); however, studies using different genotypes indicate variability in susceptibility, particularly in the extent of seroconversion ( 13 , 14 ). Although little is known about the persistence of AIV antibodies in wild mammals, serologic surveillance might provide a more complete picture of past exposure to potentially infected avian (reservoir) hosts than molecular testing alone. The discrepancy in NP- and H5-antibody detection leaves the possibility of other AIV subtypes undergoing initial seroconversion, so a combination of testing approaches seems advisable. H5-specific antibodies in carnivores and wild Suidae species indicate ongoing spillover events, especially in wetland habitats potentially shared with main (reservoir) hosts (Anseriformes and Charadriiformes). The role of wild boars warrants further attention because Suidae species are considered mixing vessels for swine-, human-, and avian-derived IAVs ( 15 ). Every such infection in mammalian species provides opportunities for virus adaptations, so continuous surveillance is recommended. Consequently, continuous surveillance also should be considered for pet animals in hotspot areas (e.g., free-ranging cats or hunting dogs) as further potential bridges for transmitting infections from wildlife to private households. Dr. Günther is a veterinarian and a postdoctoral researcher at the Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Greifswald–Insel Riems, Germany. Her primary research interests are avian viruses and other pathogens with potential influence on avian species conservation, wildlife, and public health concerns. Top We thank all hunters contributing to this study, especially the hunters organized by the Jagdverband Rügen-Hiddensee; Bianka Hillmann, Julien Schäfer, Alrik-Markis Kunisch, Martina Abs, Kristin Trippler, and Diana Parlow for excellent technical assistance; and Ralf Redmer, Thomas Pieper, Marco Beerbohm, Sophia Ziegler, Timm Harder, and Ronja Piesche for the help during dissection and laboratory diagnostics. Many thanks to the federal state of Mecklenburg–Western Pomerania for providing data (Biotoptypen-und Nutzungstypenkartierung) and to the Bundesamt für Kartografie und Geodäsie for providing data (Digi
Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL from AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides professional solutions for nuisance animals invading local homes and businesses. Our experienced team identifies the wildlife species involved, locates entry points, and develops a customized removal plan for the property. Boynton Beach’s warm climate,…Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL from AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches provides professional solutions for nuisance animals invading local homes and businesses. Our experienced team identifies the wildlife species involved, locates entry points, and develops a customized removal plan for the property. Boynton Beach’s warm climate, mature trees, waterways, parks, and established neighborhoods support raccoons, squirrels, bats, rodents, birds, and other wild animals. These animals may enter attics, walls, crawl spaces, garages, vents, and roof openings while searching for food, water, shelter, or nesting areas. Our wildlife removal process may include a detailed property inspection, humane animal removal, one-way exclusion devices, entry-point repairs, attic cleanup, and prevention recommendations. We carefully examine soffits, fascia boards, roof returns, vents, flashing, utility penetrations, and other vulnerable areas animals may use to enter a structure. Nuisance wildlife can tear insulation, chew wiring, damage wood, block vents, and contaminate indoor spaces with droppings, urine, nesting materials, and food remains. Removing the animals is only part of the solution. Securing their entry points helps prevent recurring wildlife activity and protects the property from additional damage. If you need dependable wildlife removal in Boynton Beach, FL, contact AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches today. Our team can inspect your property, explain the recommended solution, and help protect your home or business from unwanted wildlife. More on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_y_aCwXpQo On Sound Cloud: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches provides professional and humane wildlife removal services in Boynton Beach, Florida. Contact Us: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches 4440 PGA Blvd Suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens , FL , 33410 561-515-0201 Website: https://palm-beaches.aaacwildliferemoval.com/ Email: palmbeaches@aaacwildliferemoval.com Find us around the web: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aaacwildliferemovalofthepa5785 Facebook: Twitter: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/aaac-wildlife-removal Blogger: WordPress: Tumblr:
United States Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services: Staff Publications Xiaolong Li , University of Florida Follow Brandon M. Parker , University of Florida Follow Raoul K. Boughton , Archbold Biological Station Follow James C. Beasley , University of Georgia…United States Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services: Staff Publications Xiaolong Li , University of Florida Follow Brandon M. Parker , University of Florida Follow Raoul K. Boughton , Archbold Biological Station Follow James C. Beasley , University of Georgia Follow Timothy J. Smyser , United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado Follow James D. Austin , University of Florida Kim M. Pepin , United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado Follow Ryan S. Miller , United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, Center for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Fort Collins, Colorado Follow Kurt C. VerCauteren , United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado Follow Samantha M. Wisely , University of Florida Follow ORCID IDs Li https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8396-2912 Beasley https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9707-3713 Smyser https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4542-3077 Miller https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3892-0251 VerCauteren https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4783-493X Wisely https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1748-4518 Document Type Article Date of this Version 2024 Citation MDPI Viruses (2024) 16: 1397 doi: 10.3390/v16091397 Academic editor: Raymond Rowland Abstract Understanding the epidemiology and transmission dynamics of transboundary animal diseases (TADs) among wild pigs ( Sus scrofa ) will aid in preventing the introduction or containment of TADs among wild populations. Given the challenges associated with studying TADs in free-ranging populations, a surrogate pathogen system may predict how pathogens may circulate and be maintained within wild free-ranging swine populations, how they may spill over into domestic populations, and how management actions may impact transmission. We assessed the suitability of Torque teno sus virus 1 (TTSuV1) to serve as a surrogate pathogen for molecular epidemiological studies in wild pigs by investigating the prevalence, persistence, correlation with host health status and genetic variability at two study areas: Archbold’s Buck Island Ranch in Florida and Savannah River Site in South Carolina. We then conducted a molecular epidemiological case study within Archbold’s Buck Island Ranch site to determine how analysis of this pathogen could inform transmission dynamics of a directly transmitted virus. Prevalence was high in both study areas (40%, n = 190), and phylogenetic analyses revealed high levels of genetic variability within and between study areas. Our case study showed that pairwise host relatedness and geographic distance were highly correlated to pairwise viral genetic similarity. Molecular epidemiological analyses revealed a distinct pattern of direct transmission from pig to pig occurring within and between family groups. Our results suggest that TTSuV1 is highly suitable for molecular epidemiological analyses and will be useful for future studies of transmission dynamics in wild free-ranging pigs. DOWNLOADS Since November 23, 2024 Included in Natural Resources and Conservation Commons , Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons , Other Environmental Sciences Commons , Other Veterinary Medicine Commons , Population Biology Commons , Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons , Veterinary Infectious Diseases Commons , Veterinary Microbiology and Immunobiology Commons , Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Epidemiology, and Public Health Commons , Zoology Commons COinS
AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL provides professional solutions for nuisance wildlife problems in homes and businesses throughout the local area. As part of AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches, our team helps property owners address wildlife activity safely, humanely, and effectively. Boynton Beach’s warm weather,…AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach AAAC Wildlife Removal Boynton Beach, FL provides professional solutions for nuisance wildlife problems in homes and businesses throughout the local area. As part of AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches, our team helps property owners address wildlife activity safely, humanely, and effectively. Boynton Beach’s warm weather, mature trees, canals, parks, and established neighborhoods create favorable conditions for raccoons, squirrels, bats, rodents, birds, and other wild animals. These animals may enter attics, walls, crawl spaces, garages, vents, and roof openings while searching for food, water, shelter, or a safe place to raise their young. Our wildlife removal services may include detailed property inspections, species identification, humane animal removal, one-way exclusion, entry-point repairs, attic cleanup, and prevention planning. We carefully inspect soffits, fascia boards, roof returns, vents, flashing, utility penetrations, and other vulnerable areas that wildlife may use to enter a building. Unwanted animals can damage insulation, wood, ductwork, and electrical wiring. They may also leave behind droppings, urine, nesting materials, food remains, and unpleasant odors. Addressing both the animals and their access points can help reduce property damage and prevent recurring wildlife problems. If you need wildlife removal in Boynton Beach, FL, contact AAAC Wildlife Removal Palm Beaches today. Our experienced team can inspect your property, explain the recommended solution, and help protect your home or business from future wildlife activity. More on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_y_aCwXpQo On Sound Cloud: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches provides professional and humane wildlife removal services in Boynton Beach, Florida. Contact Us: AAAC Wildlife Removal - Palm Beaches 4440 PGA Blvd Suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens , FL , 33410 561-515-0201 Website: https://palm-beaches.aaacwildliferemoval.com/ Email: palmbeaches@aaacwildliferemoval.com Find us around the web: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@aaacwildliferemovalofthepa5785 Facebook: Twitter: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/aaac-wildlife-removal Blogger: WordPress: Tumblr:
Center, Internet, Wildlife Damage Management TWS Wildlife Damage Management Working Group Newsletter: Spring/Summer 2000 – Volume 7(2)2 Date of this Version 2000 Document Type Article Abstract From The Chair: Apologies From The Editor:: ;Minutes Of the TWS’s Wildlife Damage Management Working Group 2000 Annual Meeting, Nashville,, Tennessee; when it comes…Center, Internet, Wildlife Damage Management TWS Wildlife Damage Management Working Group Newsletter: Spring/Summer 2000 – Volume 7(2)2 Date of this Version 2000 Document Type Article Abstract From The Chair: Apologies From The Editor:: ;Minutes Of the TWS’s Wildlife Damage Management Working Group 2000 Annual Meeting, Nashville,, Tennessee; when it comes To Fish, Herons Have Good Taste; Wolf Handling & Chemical immobilization For Captive Wolf Managers and Related Personnel; Announcing The Availability Of A New Publication on Managing White--Tailed Deer in Suburban Environments; Application For Membership / The Wildlife Society DOWNLOADS Since November 09, 2010 COinS
WATCH EPISODE Somewhere deep in British Columbia’s boreal forest lives a small population of unique and secretive carnivores most humans never see. The fisher ( Pekania pennanti ) is a critter exceptionally good at eluding even the most talented wildlife trackers. But for today’s guests, who have spent many cold…WATCH EPISODE Somewhere deep in British Columbia’s boreal forest lives a small population of unique and secretive carnivores most humans never see. The fisher ( Pekania pennanti ) is a critter exceptionally good at eluding even the most talented wildlife trackers. But for today’s guests, who have spent many cold mornings out in the field to learn more about these mustelids, even the stealthiest of fishers couldn’t keep all of their secrets. In this episode of “Our Wild Lives,” Katie Perkins-Rohrbach, TWS digital content manager, is joined by Alexia Constantino, a PhD Candidate at the University of Victoria and Rich Weir, a senior wildlife biologist at Artemis Wildlife Consultants, to explore their combined decades of experience researching fishers. “Our Wild Lives” is The Wildlife Society’s biweekly podcast, sharing compelling stories from wildlife professionals doing critical work around the world. Your hosts, Katie Perkins-Rohrbach and Ed Arnett, of The Wildlife Society, bring you thought-provoking conversations with leading experts and emerging voices. Podcast by Katie Perkins-Rohrbach
Thanks to traces left at hummingbird feeders, researchers have extended the known range of endangered bats in Arizona. “Mexican long-nosed bats are in Arizona; they feed from hummingbird feeders, and they may be in other areas that we just don’t know yet until we do a genetic survey,” said Faith…Thanks to traces left at hummingbird feeders, researchers have extended the known range of endangered bats in Arizona. “Mexican long-nosed bats are in Arizona; they feed from hummingbird feeders, and they may be in other areas that we just don’t know yet until we do a genetic survey,” said Faith Walker, an associate research professor in wildlife genetics at Northern Arizona University. Using trail cameras, researchers had recently confirmed that tequila bats ( Leptonycteris yerbabuenae ) were taking advantage of artificial hummingbird feeders. The sweet sugar water in the feeders may be helping the species boost their resources in areas that didn’t have as many of the flowering agave plants they usually rely on. But to the naked eye, tequila bats look quite similar to closely related Mexican long-nosed bats ( L. nivalis ), which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lists as endangered . Sorting tequila from long noses In a study published recently in Environmental DNA , Walker and her colleagues tested some of these hummingbird feeders in Portal, Arizona, for DNA to see if the endangered bats also visited hummingbird feeders. The study started with Walker and her coauthor, Kristen Lear of Bat Conservation International. Lear was videorecording Mexican long-nosed bats to see which flowering agave plants they visited in Mexico. She swabbed these plants and sent them to Walker for DNA analysis. Mexican long-nosed bats are considered federally endangered in the U.S. Credit: Horizonline Pictures/Bat Conservation International The team developed an assay—a solution that detects species—using two methods. They used a metabarcoding technique to detect all species present and another cheaper assay to detect just Mexican long-nosed bats. In follow-up work, Lear and Walker swabbed hummingbird feeders in areas where bats had been detected in Portal. With the help of citizen scientists, they gathered samples in the small town in the foothills of the Chiricahua Mountains. At first, they weren’t sure whether bats would leave DNA traces on these portals, since they only stick their tongues through the access holes to lap up nectar. “We screened them and found they worked great for detecting any Leptonycteris, ” Walker said. Research technician Anna Riley tests samples for bat DNA. Credit: Kiera Majzner From this work, the team in 2024 confirmed the presence of Mexican long-nosed bats for the first time in Arizona. Previously, researchers believed the species was only found in Mexico, Texas and New Mexico. But this discovery confirms the suspicions of some biologists that the Chiricahua Mountains might provide good habitat for the creatures. Walker hopes to take this technique to a wider area around Portal to see if Mexican long-nosed bats have an even larger range there. She and her team are also swabbing agave flowers in New Mexico to better understand the migration routes these bats take every year. “Genetic tools are a great way for tracking this species because they are so cryptic,” she said. Walker said that the DNA tests they developed aren’t yet able to differentiate between individual bats. But the technology is there if she can get the funding to do it. In the future, she hopes to get a better understanding of the number of bats that visit Portal. Article by Joshua Rapp Learn
When the bell rings, high school science teacher Brett Moyer reaches for his binoculars and heads for the beach. Each month of the year, he’s on the hunt for one of Florida’s most beloved birds: black skimmers. The only bird in the world that hunts by touch, black skimmers (…When the bell rings, high school science teacher Brett Moyer reaches for his binoculars and heads for the beach. Each month of the year, he’s on the hunt for one of Florida’s most beloved birds: black skimmers. The only bird in the world that hunts by touch, black skimmers ( Rynchops niger ) get their name from skimming their bottom beak along the top of the water, feeling for fish. Moyer is training his camera not on their black and orange beaks but on their ankles. Wildlife biologists at the United States Geological Survey’s Bird Banding Laboratory have caught and banded some of the skimmers. The lab has been tracking birds for more than a century to understand more about their migrations and populations. Usually, the project relies on hunters submitting banded birds of downed waterfowl or individuals sending in reports of dead birds they found in the wild. But citizen scientist Moyer decided to jump into the research himself by photographing the banded birds at a distance and submitting his findings to the Federal Bird Banding Lab . Over five years, he took more than 1,000 photographs of 347 distinct birds. In new research published in PLOS One , Moyer showed that black skimmers can travel to Florida from states along the Atlantic coast, a journey of up to 1,500 kilometers. Moyer saw little dispersal from the Gulf, even though birds in western Florida were less than 250 kilometers away. He also documented the largest natal flight of any black skimmer ever recorded, meaning the journey from a bird’s birthplace to the first location it attempts to breed, at 281 kilometers. “The approach modeled here could be applied by citizen scientists investigating other bird species and non-avian species with field-readable tags,” Moyer wrote in his paper. Read more at PLOS One.
Back to Resources This new version of TWS’ Lead (Pb) and Wildlife Fact Sheet reflects updated research and additional information on this topic, and features a new design with TWS’ new logo for 2026.
WHEN October 16, 2026 @ 12:00am–November 8, 2026 @ 9:00pm EST JOIN https://givebutter.com/c/tws2026/auction The Wildlife Society is celebrating 90 years of supporting wildlife and wildlife professionals across North America and beyond. Help us strengthen our mission by participating in this year’s 2026 Silent Auction, and continue to promote wildlife conservation…WHEN October 16, 2026 @ 12:00am–November 8, 2026 @ 9:00pm EST JOIN https://givebutter.com/c/tws2026/auction The Wildlife Society is celebrating 90 years of supporting wildlife and wildlife professionals across North America and beyond. Help us strengthen our mission by participating in this year’s 2026 Silent Auction, and continue to promote wildlife conservation science, research, and the professionals who drive these efforts. Our 2026 Silent Auction is now officially LIVE! All funds raised will support student and early-career professional initiatives during the conference, allowing us to invest in the next generation of leaders in our field. These initiatives represent more than $80,000 in annual support, and this year, we aim to raise $20,000 through the silent auction! Every bid brings us closer to our goal. Whether you bid on an item or share the auction with your network, your support truly makes a difference. Browse the auction, place your bids, and help us achieve our $20,000 goal! Bid now on brands such as Vortex Optics, SITKA, Patagonia, REI, LOWA Boots, Insect Shield and more! Plus wildlife adventures of a lifetime to countries including Africa, Sri Lanka, Guatemala and British Columbia, Canada.
Back to Resources A flock of an esimated one million snow geese (Anser caerulescens) migrating through central North Dakota. Credit: Rick Bohn The Wildlife Society submitted comments to USFWS in response to a Request for Information on Implementation of Drain Tile Setbacks. Our comments emphasized the efficacy of the 2024…Back to Resources A flock of an esimated one million snow geese (Anser caerulescens) migrating through central North Dakota. Credit: Rick Bohn The Wildlife Society submitted comments to USFWS in response to a Request for Information on Implementation of Drain Tile Setbacks. Our comments emphasized the efficacy of the 2024 Drain Tile Setback Rule in ensuring protections for wetlands on private agricultural lands in the Prairie Pothole Region. These wetlands provide critical habitat for breeding waterfowl, shorebirds, and amphibians, and habitat for other species of wildlife. TWS asks USFWS to uphold and continue to implement the 2024 rule.
Back to Resources Jaguars fought and sometimes killed pumas and ocelots. Credit: Bernard DUPONT Ecotourists in the Brazilian Pantanal are getting front-row seats to watch battles between apex predators like jaguars and pumas, with the occasional ocelot fight thrown in as an opener. As tourists have become more regular fixtures…Back to Resources Jaguars fought and sometimes killed pumas and ocelots. Credit: Bernard DUPONT Ecotourists in the Brazilian Pantanal are getting front-row seats to watch battles between apex predators like jaguars and pumas, with the occasional ocelot fight thrown in as an opener. As tourists have become more regular fixtures in the giant wetlands of Brazil, large carnivores have become more accustomed to their presence, researchers say. This has resulted in an increasing number of recorded incidents of jaguars fighting cougars or ocelots, giving scientists new insight into behavior that wasn’t previously well documented or studied, as it’s difficult to observe. In a recent study, researchers describe a number of different cases of jaguars ( Panthera onca ) fighting and often killing pumas ( Puma concolor ) and ocelots ( Leopardus pardalis )—sometimes eating parts of them as well. Read more in Ecology and Evolution.
Rising temperatures in a Southcentral Alaska river are driving a noticeable change in the behavior of invasive northern pike. As the water warms, these predators are eating more, raising concerns about the future of native fish such as salmon. Researchers led by the University of Alaska Fairbanks examined the stomach…Rising temperatures in a Southcentral Alaska river are driving a noticeable change in the behavior of invasive northern pike. As the water warms, these predators are eating more, raising concerns about the future of native fish such as salmon. Researchers led by the University of Alaska Fairbanks examined the stomach contents of northern pike collected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Deshka River during the summers of 2021 and 2022. They compared those findings with samples taken from pike in the same river about ten years earlier. Their analysis showed that pike across all age groups increased their fish consumption as temperatures rose. The change was especially striking among younger fish, with year-old pike consuming 63 percent more fish than before. The findings were published in the journal Biological Invasions . "We expect there will be significant warming in the future, and the amount of fish that pike consume is going to increase with it," said Benjamin Rich, who led the study while pursuing his graduate degree at the UAF College of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences. Rising Temperatures in Air and Water The study area has already experienced a steady warming trend. Average summer air temperatures have climbed by about 3 degrees Fahrenheit since 1919, including an increase of 0.8 degrees over the past decade. Water temperatures in the Deshka River, which flows into the Susitna River, have also remained above historical averages in recent years, Rich said. Looking ahead, scientists expect this warming to continue throughout the 21st century. Models suggest that northern pike could increase their food intake by another 6%-12% by the year 2100. Warmer Water Boosts Predator Appetite The growing appetite of pike in the Deshka River reflects patterns seen in other freshwater systems. As water temperatures rise, predator metabolism speeds up, increasing their energy demands and pushing them to feed more aggressively. This shift is particularly troubling in Southcentral Alaska, where northern pike were introduced illegally and now share habitat with Chinook and coho salmon populations that are already in decline. Interestingly, the number of Chinook and coho salmon found in pike stomachs dropped over the past decade. Researchers suggest this likely reflects the shrinking salmon populations in the river rather than reduced predation. Salmon Face Multiple Pressures Salmon are already under strain from warming conditions, said UAF fisheries professor Peter Westley. More aggressive predation adds another layer of pressure in an already challenging environment. "We know that invasive species and climate are individually associated with freshwater fish extinctions," said Westley, a co-author of the study. "Those impacts may be working together into the future." Complex Ecosystem Changes Erik Schoen, a researcher at UAF's International Arctic Research Center, emphasized the importance of understanding these interconnected effects. Salmon are a key species, but they are only one part of a broader ecosystem influenced by rising temperatures. "There's been a lot of work done about how changes in temperature affect salmon directly. That's really important, but salmon aren't alone in these rivers," said Schoen, who also contributed to the paper. "It's also important to understand how these changes are affecting salmon indirectly through their predators, prey and pathogens." Other contributors to the research included Adam Sepulveda and Jeffrey Falke of the U.S. Geological Survey and Daniel Rinella of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
On Sept. 4, 2026, President Trump signed the Executive Order, Supporting America’s Ranchers. Although the order addresses a range of issues affecting ranchers, much of the public discussion that followed has focused on one issue: wolves. Contrary to some headlines, the order itself does not delist wolves. The Endangered Species…On Sept. 4, 2026, President Trump signed the Executive Order, Supporting America’s Ranchers. Although the order addresses a range of issues affecting ranchers, much of the public discussion that followed has focused on one issue: wolves. Contrary to some headlines, the order itself does not delist wolves. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) does not grant the president that authority. Instead, the order directs the secretary of the Interior to determine whether gray wolves ( Canis lupus ) and Mexican wolves ( Canis lupus baileyi ) have met recovery criteria for delisting or downlisting pursuant to the ESA and, if so, to begin the appropriate administrative process for making the change. Perhaps more notably, the order also calls for legislative recommendations to remove or reduce ESA protections for wolves. The order’s call for legislative recommendations is notable because it would potentially avoid scientific and legal challenges that have prevented wolf delisting in the past. It also indicates that the administration views delisting or downlisting as the desired policy outcome prior to a determination of wolf recovery status under ESA. This may not be a new issue, but there are several new elements that could alter both wolf management and ESA interpretation moving forward. Not a presidential decision The U.S. Endangered Species Act was designed to separate biological determinations from political considerations. Whether a species should be listed, downlisted or delisted is typically decided through a scientific and administrative process led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). That process requires a review of the best available scientific and commercial data, publication of a proposed rule, peer review, public comment and ultimately a final agency determination. Economic impacts and political preferences are not among the statutory factors used to determine whether a species warrants ESA protection. As a result, the Executive Order does not change the current legal status of wolves today. Any administrative delisting effort would still need to proceed through the established ESA process and survive judicial scrutiny. Rulemaking déjà vu In 2020, during the first Trump administration, the USFWS finalized a nationwide delisting rule after concluding that gray wolf recovery objectives had been achieved across much of the species’ range. In 2022, a federal court vacated that rule and restored federal protections across most of the United States. According to the administration’s new order, the USFWS is once again being asked to review whether wolves have met recovery criteria and whether another delisting effort should move forward, setting the stage for renewed scientific scrutiny and likely legal conflict. Lessons from previous delisting efforts The 2022 court ruling did not conclude that wolves had failed to recover. Rather, the court found that the USFWS had inadequately analyzed wolves outside of core recovery areas, failed to sufficiently address the species’ historical range and did not adequately justify its interpretation of several key ESA requirements. As a result, the decision became less of a referendum on wolf abundance and more a debate over how recovery should be assessed under the law. The ambiguity of ESA terms such as “significant portion of its range,” “foreseeable future” and the adequacy of “regulatory mechanisms” remain largely unresolved and will continue to dominate legal debates moving forward. The Supreme Court’s 2024 decision overturning Chevron deference may further elevate these disputes. The Chevron deference was a legal doctrine that instructed courts to defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute. Now, rather than deferring to USFWS’ interpretations of ESA, courts are expected to exercise independent judgment when interpreting the statute. So, upcoming legal disputes about wolves may focus more on statutory meaning rather than biological facts. This could have lasting implications for the ESA because judicial interpretations of statutory language often prove more durable than agency interpretations, which can change across administrations. For wolves and the case at hand, greater judicial control over statutory interpretation does not inherently favor or discourage delisting. A ruling could go either way. The legislative pathway While much of the public attention has focused on the order’s directive to review wolf recovery status, the most consequential provision may be the one that receives the least attention. The order directs the secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the White House, to prepare legislative recommendations for fully delisting or downlisting gray wolves and Mexican wolves under the ESA. That language reflects the recognition that administrative delisting may again face lengthy litigation and uncertain judicial review. To emphasize just how long judicial review can take, the USFWS’ appeal of the 2022 court ruling is still ongoing. Oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals are scheduled for October 2026. A legislative solution would shift the debate from administrative processes and judicial interpretation of the ESA to congressional policymaking. Congress has the authority to amend the ESA or remove protections for specific species directly through statute. In fact, Congress previously used this approach in 2011 when it directed the delisting of northern Rocky Mountain gray wolves. Since Congress has the authority to amend the ESA or directly alter a species’ legal status through legislation, many of the scientific and interpretive disputes that have characterized wolf litigation and rulemaking for decades would no longer need to be resolved through the ESA’s administrative framework. In other words, Congress could consider factors beyond the best available science. Whether Congress is willing to pursue such legislation remains uncertain. But the request itself signals that the administration may view legislation, rather than rulemaking alone, as the more durable path toward changing wolf management nationwide. Looking ahead Wildlife professionals should view the order less as a final decision and more as the opening of another chapter in an ongoing policy debate. The coming months will likely involve scientific reviews, stakeholder engagement, political discussions and potentially congressional action. Questions about recovery, state management capacity, livestock conflict, ecological impacts and public values will all remain part of the conversation. What is clear today is that wolves have not been delisted. The legal status of gray wolves and Mexican wolves remains unchanged. What has changed is that the administration has made wolves a priority and has signaled interest in both administrative and legislative avenues for reducing federal protections. While we’ve been here before, the legal landscape surrounding wolf recovery has changed. Whether wolves are ultimately delisted may depend not only on biological assessments but also on how courts interpret the ESA and whether Congress chooses to act. Article by Cameron J. Kovach
Throwing a party is often how we bring people together and build community, which is essential for human well-being. Trees may not throw parties, but they are still important community … Read more The post Plan a Garden Party and Find Out What Native Tree YOU Are! appeared first on…Throwing a party is often how we bring people together and build community, which is essential for human well-being. Trees may not throw parties, but they are still important community … Read more The post Plan a Garden Party and Find Out What Native Tree YOU Are! appeared first on The National Wildlife Federation Blog.
This Plastic Free July, take the time to learn more about how plastic pollution in the oceans of the world harms marine life and consider action steps you can take … Read more The post Marine Animal Quiz: It’s Plastic Free July! appeared first on The National Wildlife Federation Blog.
Although there are similar species across both continents, European and North American strategies for waterfowl management are vastly different. A new paper published in Wildlife Society Bulletin points to cultural and geopolitical factors that shape North American and European conservation strategies, offering opportunities for collaboration. In our latest Q&A, TWS…Although there are similar species across both continents, European and North American strategies for waterfowl management are vastly different. A new paper published in Wildlife Society Bulletin points to cultural and geopolitical factors that shape North American and European conservation strategies, offering opportunities for collaboration. In our latest Q&A, TWS spoke with TWS member Kevin Ringelman, an assistant professor at the University of California, Davis, and lead author of the paper. He’s worked across all four North American flyways and studies the intersections of waterfowl behavior and population ecology with a focus on applied management. Kevin Ringelman Ringelman cowrote the paper after attending the Pan-European Duck Symposium and learning from European researchers and managers about the current trends and challenges in waterfowl management there. We discuss what each continent can learn from the other when it comes to waterfowl research and conservation and what’s next in our latest Q&A. Ringelman’s answers are edited for style and brevity. What are the differences in cultural values that drive conservation in North America and Europe? In the United States and Canada, there’s pretty good alignment on conservation values among the public. There’s the understanding that hunters are part of the conservation enterprise. In both countries, hunters pay for licenses, the money of which goes back into habitat conservation programs. Most Americans are broadly supportive of legal, regulated hunting. In the U.S., we have conservation funding mechanisms like duck stamps and the Pittman Robertson Act, so while hunters take some birds out of the wild, they’re also giving back to habitat conservation. But in Europe, that’s not necessarily the case. While there is variation among countries, generally speaking, hunting is seen as being at odds with conservation. It’s seen as a zero-sum game. Hunters kill birds, and wildlife should be preserved in their pristine state and not exploited. Generally, there are fewer institutionalized mechanisms by which hunters give back to conservation across Europe. What does waterfowl management look like across both continents? We’re at very different places in how we manage waterfowl. Europe is still working on understanding its populations. When populations breed in areas like northern Scandinavia or Russia, it’s hard to access and study them. The regulations in Europe seem to be largely set on the precautionary principle—the idea that if we just don’t know, then we should just not harvest them. Their regulatory frameworks have much fewer levers to pull. In terms of duck hunting, North America has season lengths and bag limits by species. In Europe, the regulatory levers mostly involve whether the species is open to hunting or not. And some of the earliest regulations the U.S. and Canada have put into place, like bag limits and banning lead shot for waterfowl, night hunting and baiting for harvest, commonly still occur in parts of Europe. What are some of the challenges of implementing waterfowl management plans in Europe? There are really invested communities on both sides of the Atlantic. But here in North America, we have so many more institutionalized funding mechanisms from state governments, federal governments, universities and NGOs. Ducks Unlimited just this year completed a $4 billion fundraising campaign for habitat conservation, and there’s no Ducks Unlimited in Europe If North America is where we have a lot of money to do waterfowl science and conservation, some of the onus is on us to reach out to our European colleagues with support. We could exchange students where they lack a lot of the institutionalized support mechanisms that we enjoy here. Here in the United States, the federal government unifies a lot of our hunting regulations and follows scientific frameworks for how those regulations are set. Europe is a big place split into all these countries with its own federal governments and its own states within those federal entities. So, trying to coordinate waterfowl science and conservation across those countries within Europe is just a staggering challenge. There isn’t a lot of alignment among European countries today. In the Scandinavian countries that have many more rural areas with low population density, hunting is much more accepted. And then places like France and the U.K. have a more mature sort of conservation enterprise than some of the former Soviet states. What can each continent learn from one another about waterfowl research and management? We share a lot of species, or have sister species, between Europe and North America, like the northern pintail ( Anas acuta ). In North America, we’ve learned so much about what makes these populations tick that could be translated to species in Europe. For example, we’ve spent hundreds of millions of dollars putting transmitters on ducks to study things like habitat selection and use in response to conservation and migration routes. That same push for advanced telemetry studies hasn’t really taken off as much in Europe. Instead, they’re approaching questions of movement ecology from a more theoretical standpoint, making predictions of how ducks should move in relation to these resources. We need to get those theoretical models to North America, and we need to deploy radio transmitters in Europe so that we can fully populate both sides of the equation. Europeans also think a lot about waterfowl as a means of spreading species, like wetland seeds and invertebrates getting on waterfowl feathers or being ingested and spreading from wetland to wetland. When we think about the spread of wetland plants in the United States, we think about boats and waterways, but waterfowl are potentially one means of connecting wetlands. That’s another really obvious avenue where we can learn a thing or two and do some super cool research from an ecology perspective. Article by Olivia Milloway
